| From: | Neo Liu <diabloneo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #14588: Postgres process blocked on semop |
| Date: | 2017-03-13 02:29:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAF_Sdb8TjWfMq5B6fd5v=kgRtiPbyrX87LBK0gTj4ODsVq4gnw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:03 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2017-03-12 04:30:52 +0000, Neo Liu wrote:
> > *The pstack screenshot*
> > It shows two process's stack, one is pid 186397 who were in
> authentication,
> > and the other is 188832 who where in INSERT.
>
> This suggest you're having quite massive contention around
> ProcArrayLock. You should consider updating to 9.6. Several releases
> since 9.2 considerably improved scalability around this (especially
> 9.6).
> Regards,
>
> Andres
>
Thanks, Andres
I think upgrading to newest version is a good way, but I can't perform it
on a production system before we doing sufficient testing.
Currently, I want to know if this is a bug of pgsql 9.2.16, and how can I
avoid this situation.
Thanks, diabloneo
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neo Liu | 2017-03-13 02:36:41 | Re: BUG #14588: Postgres process blocked on semop |
| Previous Message | Venkata B Nagothi | 2017-03-13 00:06:00 | Re: [BUGS] Bug in Physical Replication Slots (at least 9.5)? |